From a convo on Youtube. Man people sure are stupid.
S C G: I really enjoy Jordan Peterson, the psychology professor - his university lectures are pretty interesting. I am less enamored with Jordan Peterson, the public figure, but his message of finding purpose in responsibility seems to resonate with a lot of people. He’s not without his flaws though.
Alan Silva: I’m at the same place as you are. I like when JP talks about psychology, it’s nice because it’s his area, but when he talks about politics or climate change, I kinda cringe. I can’t say he’s a dumbass, because his lectures and videos about depression actually helped me go through some really hard times.
Autumn Dark: Regarding his wheelhouse of clinical psychology, Jordan Peterson comes across as brilliant to my simpleton mind and seems to be a very important individual to surface in the various platforms of modern media for many folks who like myself are in times of depression or loneliness. Regarding his opinions on anthropomorphic induced climate change he is dangerously, fundamentally wrong.
Parodites: @Alan Silva I doubt you have a single reasonable argument to any of his politics, which is a very level-headed politics and not ideologically biased one way or another. I find your remark especially curious given the fact that JP never even really talks about politics as such and the most ‘radical’ thing he ventured was the idea that the State should not legally mandate certain verbiage. It’s like this video. JP never said ‘women shouldn’t be aggressive’, he just related the statistical and clinical data that indicates women express aggression in non-physical ways, while men tend to be more physically aggressive, and to be more aggressive generally, which should be obvious given the presence of testosterone. I thought that was a premise of Leftist ideology anyway, that men in particular, as a gender, are aggressive and toxic. At any rate, acknowledging the fact that women do not tend to be aggressive is not the same thing as saying you don’t think women should be aggressive. Acknowledging that something exists does not mean you’re endorsing its existence. That was one random “point” this video made, but they all similarly fall apart immediately because its a critique aimed at something JP never proposed in the first place, and therefor just arguing with itself really. Take another one, poverty. JP reflects on power distribution laws and the fact that, for example, 90 percent of the light in a galaxy comes from 10 percent of the brightest stars,- this distribution occurs at every level and scale of the physical universe; the fact that it occurs in human wealth distribution, with 10 percent of an elite class owning 90 percent of the wealth, is not surprising. JP does not defend this and often states that it is a complex issue to work on because we’re basically trying to resolve what amounts to a metaphysical problem in the structure of reality itself- by trying to get to a “better” distribution of wealth, we’re fighting a law of the universe. He does not “endorse” this distribution like it’s something positive, like it’s good, he simply acknowledges its existence. He no more thinks it’s a good thing than he thinks suffering is a good thing by acknowledging that suffering is basically an immutable fact of existence.
Alan Silva: right…
Parodites: @Alan Silva Is that meant to imply you think I just lied to you? Is what I just said not true? Like I said, I further doubt you have any legitimate criticism.
Alan Silva: @Parodites it means that I didn’t even read the comment entirely. You’re right, though. I don’t have any legitimate criticism. It’s only my opinion.
Parodites: @Alan Silva So you’re close-minded in addition to launching baseless attacks on JP, (despite your close-mindedness, I’m still going to write my thoughts here for anyone interested: go ahead and ignore them and probably everything else you don’t want to hear) in all likeliness because your friends don’t like him and told you his politics was evil. (He doesn’t even talk politics, save for on one point concerning the idea of legally binding people to the use of certain language.) And he’s not a climate change denier either, the only time he talked about it was to say that the economic consequences of, for example, shutting down our own infrastructure in the interest of protecting the earth, are not simply to be dismissed as inconsequent matters, as they will lead to the US becoming more energy dependent on foreign sources of power, which in turn will give us a lot less leverage when dealing with Russia, for example, who might decide to exploit our disadvantage and, oh I don’t know… invade Ukraine or something to score more control of oil … or something, that’s just one hypothetical consequence that probably could never happen in this day and age, right?
Having lost so much of that leverage I alluded to under Biden, the Paris Accords, etc., now we cannot do anything about Russia’s expansion effort besides ban imports of their oil, which is going to make our own gas prices jump up to double what they are in a few days or weeks, further bankrupting everyone, if covid regulations have not already done that, as they’ve already destroyed all smaller businesses. Only large businesses like Walmart, with oceans of surplus capital, were able to survive the periods of intense lockdown; the world belongs to corporations now. So we’re getting a double wammy this year of getting fcked out of all our money. Great political decisions for everyone all around. I’m sure the State truly did all of this because they love the earth so much and wanted to protect the climate and ensure the coming generations have somewhere to live … they didn’t just use that as the excuse for dim-witted but good-willed masses, when in reality all of it was intentional and done completely amorally, just to further enrich and empower corporate interests in the manner I’ve described. Oh, I am SURE they did this out of love for the earth. Because they’re such great, honest, and heroic people. To believe otherwise would be a dangerous conspiracy theory which the Federal government in the US just this week, because it constitutes “misinformation”, would deem “potentially terroristic”,- something for which I’d get my name on a list to be further monitored with impunity, as I most certainly am already on.
As to the rest of you. None of you people know a f**cking thing. Your politics isn’t even real, it’s a phantom. It’s a red-herring engineered by State sponsored think-tanks meant to ensure the exact opposite of what it claims to profess, and further empower- the State, as I wrote concerning the politics surrounding climate change. All Biden’s green-policies have done is shift more geopolitical power to China, which produces more pollution that anyone, because it has made the US energy dependent on them, and thereby empowered states like Russia for example, inasmuch as they seize upon the opportunity provided by our current disadvantage- as Russia has certainly done with Ukraine. Haven’t done a goddamn thing to protect the environment, all it’s done is further empower the state and corporate interests at play in this nightmarish geopolitical chess-board.